Subject: Traffic Scofflaws After Mayor Thompson presented the declaration of Bike-to-Work Week for 2001, Hal Cain (president of Cache Valley Veloists Bicycle Touring club) and I heard comments from Council members Kerr and Pearce about poor compliance with the law by many local cyclists. At a subsequent planning meeting with the Mayor and city officials, Public Works Director Kevin Hansen objected to providing unfunded services to cyclists who did not respect traffic laws, especially stop signs and signals. On both occasions, Hal and I immediately agreed that cyclists should, for their own safety and best interests, obey traffic laws. We encouraged and supported education and awareness efforts as well as an announced program of enforcement of traffic laws as they apply to all travelers, including cyclists. I've thought a lot about those charges in the several weeks since. While I still agree that cyclists should obey the law, I believe the accusations are the result of a perspective bias. Let me tell you what I see from a bicycle seat. A noticeable number of motorists are traffic scofflaws. I see a variety of violations by motorists on a regular basis. Motorists, too, may fail to obey stop signs and lights. The "California Stop" is frequently seen in residential areas. "Right Turn on Red" is often performed without a stop. In spite of the convenience of mechanical turn signals, they are often unused or used incorrectly. I see many motorists signal a turn only during a turn and not before the turn, as required. Other motorists use a signal to try to gain the right-of-way when making an illegal maneuver (usually the result of a lack of planning and preparation). At least once a week, maybe more, I see a motorist making a running right turn from a left turn lane. Nearly as often I will notice a motorist make a left turn into the oncoming lane on the new street. Then of course, there are the speed limit violations. Those are often hard to recognize from a bike seat, but easy to recognize in others by driving a car at the legal speed limit, noting the traffic that passes or piles up behind you. I would suggest that a motoring council member or public works director more readily notices infractions by nearby bicyclists, while not noticing so many of the infractions by fellow motorists. From my perspective as a bicyclist and a motorist, I would claim that there are a good number of law abiding travelers and scofflaws among both cyclists and motorists. The scofflaws place a low value on obedience and common good, but place a high value on their own personal advantage by ignoring laws when the consequences are small compared to the perceived benefit. Motoring and cycling scofflaws derive different benefits from breaking different laws because of the different limitations and capabilities of their mode of travel. Cyclists rarely exceed the speed limit, but readily recognize the personal energy savings when they can avoid slowing or stopping. None of the complaints I heard about cyclists "blowing" stop signs and lights included any incidents of squealing tires or other emergency maneuvers or of cyclists being hit. I'm sure those things have happened but they are not common accompaniments of this sort of cycling violation. Since 1982, Idaho has allowed cyclists to merely yield at stop signs and right-turn-on-red. Last summer, the Interim Transportation Committee of the Utah Legislature narrowly (7-5) failed to approve a similar law for Utah. Maybe this particular "scofflaw" activity is not necessarily so hazardous or undesirable as motoring complainers might suppose. Scofflaw bicyclists have a couple of extra excuses for their actions. First, they believe that the laws do not apply to them, either in fact or in practice. You and I know that the laws do apply in fact; but we also know that our police are not in the practice of enforcing the laws against cyclists. Second, many cyclists believe that their safety is not served by following the law. This is an important misconception that seems to be culturally ingrained in the training that passes from parent to child in our community. We have the common belief, not supported by fact or law, that streets are for cars. Many bike riders believe that their prime directive is to "look out and stay out of the way of cars" and, of course, seek the magical protection of a helmet. As part of the duty to provide transportation facilities, it is important and valuable to provide demonstrably safe information about how to use those facilities, to all categories of users. So, next time someone raises the issue of scofflaw bicycles, I will again agree that such behavior is wrong. I will again encourage and endorse efforts to improve compliance with the law through educational and awareness programs as well as an announced enforcement "crackdown." But I will also point out that there are scofflaws among motorists who need the same attention, even though motorists scoff at a slightly different subset of the laws than cyclists do, because of the limitations and capabilities of their vehicles. Bob Bayn Cache Valley Veloists safety officer League of American Bicyclists "Bike Ed" safety instructor Cache MPO Ped/Bike Advisory Committee member ================ I'm not the only one to notice scofflaw motorists... ================ from: MOBILIZING THE REGION A Weekly Bulletin from the Tri-State Transportation Campaign ============================================================= Electronic Edition Number 319 May 29, 2001 ============================================================= HEADLINES ========================================== * IT'S OFFICIAL: RED LIGHT RUNNING RAMPANT ... IT'S OFFICIAL: RED LIGHT RUNNING RAMPANT NYC Comptroller and mayoral candidate Alan Hevesi released a report last week quantifying what people on NYC streets experience every day: many city drivers regard stopping on red as optional. Based on extrapolation from a week of observation, the report concludes that drivers citywide run more than 1 million lights during a typical 7am-7pm workday. The report also found that typical violators are not trucks, taxis, or tourists, but cars and SUVs with NY State plates. Hevesi used the findings to call for an expanded red- light camera program, showing that NYC lags other cities in this department. The number of stoplight scofflaws varied significantly from intersection to intersection and borough to borough. The worst intersection - E 70th St and Madison Ave. in Manhattan - was the site of an average of 56 violations per hour, or nearly one per minute. On average, just one driver per hour in Staten Island blows a light, but in Queens the average is almost 18. The Daily News reported that the five worst Brooklyn intersections were all near schools. The report underlines what advocates like Transportation Alternatives and Right-of-Way have noted for years: disrespect for basic traffic laws is widespread among NYC drivers and deadly for NYC cyclists and pedestrians (MTR #286). In its Killed by Automobile analysis, Right-of-Way found that vehicles driving through red lights or stop signs was the third greatest cause of pedestrian and cyclist death in NYC, resulting in 10% of 1,024 fatalities from 1994 to 1997 (MTR #212). Eight years after approval of NYC's pilot red-light camera program, only a few of the devices are in use - 32 cameras sprinkled among 11,000 traffic lights. In Washington, San Diego and Baltimore, the ratio of red light cameras to controlled intersections ranges from 22 to 33 per 1,000 intersections. Even with 18 additional cameras the city expects to install by the end of next month, NYC's ratio will equal just 4.5. Studies have found red-light cameras to be effective, reducing light running up to 40%. A bill introduced by Assemblyman Ivan Lafayette and State Senators Frank Padavan and Roy Goodman would make the pilot program permanent and double allowable cameras to 100. It is supported by NYC DOT and Transportation Alternatives. Hevesi argues the city must expand its program to at least 250 intersections to be on a par with other U.S. programs. * * *